Some feedback for IPACS

In my language, this would be classed as "damning with faint praise".

There is no reason why you, me, or anyone else who is not part of the IPACS Team, should be provided with commercially sensitive information such as proposed developments.
All the points you are trying to raise yet again have been asked and answered many times in the past 5 years or so. Please learn how to search the forum and you will see how often the group I call the professional complainers have raised repeatedly the same issues.

IPACS do quality work, and their updates just work - without any hotfixes to undo the damage done by the previous hotfix.
If you want Aerofly to provide a clone of some other simulator, maybe you could provide them the same budget and resources that that other simulator has?

Quote from emfrat

In my language, this would be classed as "damning with faint praise".

There is no reason why you, me, or anyone else who is not part of the IPACS Team, should be provided with commercially sensitive information such as proposed developments.
All the points you are trying to raise yet again have been asked and answered many times in the past 5 years or so. Please learn how to search the forum and you will see how often the group I call the professional complainers have raised repeatedly the same issues.

IPACS do quality work, and their updates just work - without any hotfixes to undo the damage done by the previous hotfix.
If you want Aerofly to provide a clone of some other simulator, maybe you could provide them the same budget and resources that that other simulator has?

You need to differentiate between casual players and those who take the hobby seriously. A serious player isn't a complainer, but rather someone striving for the best possible performance. Furthermore, updates are far from perfect and often require follow-up discussion. Complaints are not meant maliciously, but rather as suggestions for development.Incidentally, there is no single best flight simulator; they all have their strengths and weaknesses.

Quote from alphasixx

Having some community polls for what aircraft should be added would be a great idea

Please no, we already had a poll this year.

Hi, I actually once commented on the possible addition of the A300 or A310 (also the B767, B757, DC3, or some other cargo aircraft), which are iconic aircraft in aviation history, like the DC3 or the B767, which was the first twin-engine ETOPS to cross the ocean. However, they said it was irrelevant and wouldn't generate profit. After that, they added the ME262, which never generates much value. They forgot about the Rnav and weather bugs, as you mentioned. Thank you for the kind words. The community needs more critical thinkers for the success of this game!

• RE: Which feature do you want most in Aerofly? (Poll)

Evry development team is different. On mobile, Aerofly is the best flight simulator. It's not perfect, but nothing is perfect. Other competitors have way less detailed aircraft, Aerofly has no rain or crash physics. If you don't like Aerofly, you don't have to play it.

Quote from alphasixx

I have been with Aerofly for a little under 2 years, and I’d like to share some issues which I have with this simulator in the hopes that the developers will maybe take them into account. I’m going to try making this as constructive as possible because at the end of the day, I want this simulator to succeed and become more popular

Firstly, I believe that Aerofly lacks a proper roadmap. Other simulators which I will not specify are a lot more open with their community in terms of their plans for the coming year/months etc. Aerofly has been completely quiet in this sense lately, with almost zero information from developers as to what they are up to. As customers, I believe that we are entitled to at least know what the developers plans are. It almost seems as if the simulator has become very stagnant lately because of this, with no real progression in the base game itself such as the atmosphere which has not changed in years, clouds still look very basic, weather is still nonexistent, basic features like this which are CRUCIAL for a game that advertises itself as a simulator. Adding shiny new airliners is nice, but it won’t hide the problems which this game faces. You can’t put makeup on a grandma as we say it in my language. I understand that because of the A350 controversy that IPACS has decided to avoid sharing as much, but sharing NOTHING is not the way to go. As mentioned having a roadmap would help make it a bit more clear and hopefully eliminate people asking questions about what’s going to be added etc. The roadmap doesn’t have to be very accurate or detailed, but having an idea of what to expect in the coming year would be beneficial, in my opinion.

Lack of addressing bugs. There are so many bugs which are not being addressed for months and even years, that it’s a bit disappointing to see. A320s still suffer from ridiculous descent rates, RNAV approaches are unusable, visual bugs in the flight planner, scenery has very large objects and ‘hills’ that cover airports making it impossible to taxi at times, and so on. Bugs should be a number one priority as they inherently affect the playing experience. I can’t believe that sometimes I would search a bug up which I experienced in the sim, and see a thread from 2021, with the bug still not being fixed.

Another thing I think would be fantastic is if IPACS made the airport creation tool finally public. There are people including myself with experience in graphics and 3D modelling who would be more than happy to help make airports for Aerofly. I’m still baffled why this is not a public feature yet but rather is restricted to a select amount of members. This would help speed up airport additions in the simulator. It’s literally a win win situation.

And, finally, I believe that the community should have a bigger say in terms of what should be added to the simulator when it comes to aircraft and features. The recent addition of the ME262 caused some confusion in the forum as no one had really requested it. Of course the developers should be adding things that they WANT to work on, but that is a mindset that realistically will not allow Aerofly to grow. Having some community polls for what aircraft should be added would be a great idea to try and engage the community more, and hence more people will hopefully be satisfied.

IPACS, please take this feedback into account. Like I said earlier I truly want this simulator to succeed.

Display More

I have been a customer since 2018 and truly fell in love with this simulator. I was always excited whenever new updates were released, new features were added, and seeing how far IPACS had pushed the simulator—especially on mobile devices—was genuinely impressive.

However, in recent years, especially starting in 2024, I’ve been missing real innovation in the game. The interface still feels unchanged, long-standing bugs persist, and there are barely any new features. It feels as if the simulator has become stuck, and the lack of visible progress is disappointing for someone like me who has supported and praised this simulator for so many years. It has reached a point where I’m beginning to rethink my overall perspective on IPACS.

I truly hope you manage to turn things around and bring fresh ideas and new momentum into the simulator. You have an amazing community that genuinely appreciates your work—please make use of that for the future.

And thank you, alphasixx, for sharing your thoughts. They encouraged me to finally express my own.

Quote from 747

Evry development team is different. On mobile, Aerofly is the best flight simulator. It's not perfect, but nothing is perfect. Other competitors have way less detailed aircraft, Aerofly has no rain or crash physics. If you don't like Aerofly, you don't have to play it.

Who are all this virgil van dik anand ruben dias who always strive to defend ipacs when people have complaint, what do you mean by if doesn't like aero fly that he shouldn't play, somebody that already said he loves the game and his loyal why can't you use your eyes to read

I guess I could be called a professional complainer then as I have been asking for the very same for many a year. It is what it is and I still develop for them.

Yes its getting closer and we are working on a few extras. Where to release too is another matter altogether with the imminent closure of Higgy's site. It's only now that we realise we have all been fools to let this site fade away, I suppose we got what we deserved in the end. Perhaps IPACS will do the right thing and make it official.... oh dear there I go again, complaining

Quote from leroy999666

Who are all this virgil van dik anand ruben dias who always strive to defend ipacs when people have complaint, what do you mean by if doesn't like aero fly that he shouldn't play, somebody that already said he loves the game and his loyal why can't you use your eyes to read

I'm simply expressing my opinion here, and so are you with your posts. If you're only writing this because you don't like me and want me to change my mind, then feel free and waste your time trying to change my mind. I won't change my opinion just because others disagree.

I think IPACS is doing excellent work and deserves more respect. That's why I defend them when they're being hated (like in the case of the ME262). Like everyone else here, I'm simply writing my posts and saying what I think. At least two people have insulted me, and one has threatened me with violence, because they didn't like what I write or because I defended IPACS and said they shouldn't hate them just because an update didn't meet their expectations, and that they shouldn't badmouth Aerofly in their own forum. It is fine to say what you want to see in Aerofly in the future, but not write an endless post about everything you hate or find annoying about Aerofly, without considering that there are other people who might see things differently than you, or to accuse IPACS of not taking further development seriously.

So I think that anyone who doesn't like Aerofly doesn't have to play it.

Quote from emfrat

In my language, this would be classed as "damning with faint praise".

There is no reason why you, me, or anyone else who is not part of the IPACS Team, should be provided with commercially sensitive information such as proposed developments.
All the points you are trying to raise yet again have been asked and answered many times in the past 5 years or so. Please learn how to search the forum and you will see how often the group I call the professional complainers have raised repeatedly the same issues.

IPACS do quality work, and their updates just work - without any hotfixes to undo the damage done by the previous hotfix.
If you want Aerofly to provide a clone of some other simulator, maybe you could provide them the same budget and resources that that other simulator has?

Hi Mike,

I was somewhat surprised by your reaction, and your arguments, which I found rather unconvincing. I remember you being more approachable in the past.

Especially when some people here are sincerely talking about crucial points that are involved in ensuring the proper functioning of this simulator.

Should we consider this a minor annoyance that might be disruptive?

Or rather, must certain subjects always remain taboo?

The world is sometimes full of mysteries...

No hard feelings.

Quote from 747

I'm simply expressing my opinion here, and so are you with your posts. If you're only writing this because you don't like me and want me to change my mind, then feel free and waste your time trying to change my mind. I won't change my opinion just because others disagree.

I think IPACS is doing excellent work and deserves more respect. That's why I defend them when they're being hated (like in the case of the ME262). Like everyone else here, I'm simply writing my posts and saying what I think. At least two people have insulted me, and one has threatened me with violence, because they didn't like what I write or because I defended IPACS and said they shouldn't hate them just because an update didn't meet their expectations, and that they shouldn't badmouth Aerofly in their own forum. It is fine to say what you want to see in Aerofly in the future, but not write an endless post about everything you hate or find annoying about Aerofly, without considering that there are other people who might see things differently than you, or to accuse IPACS of not taking further development seriously.

So I think that anyone who doesn't like Aerofly doesn't have to play it.

I agree with your feelings, but we shouldn't generalize either.

If problems or bugs are reported to IPACS, it's good that they receive a response to determine whether they can be fixed or not. I don't consider this harassment, but rather additional help that could help IPACS maintain the proper functioning of this simulator.

Then ("We know the answer that's repeated too; we're a small team and we can't answer every message")

As many here, including IPACS, have said, this question has already been asked or addressed several times. I'm talking, of course, about "major fixes or repairs"—improvements are secondary. But do you know why the questions keep coming up? Because in most cases, there have never been any answers.

But that doesn't mean people are denigrating IPACS with their questions.

Quote from Tomfa

I agree with your feelings, but we shouldn't generalize either.

If problems or bugs are reported to IPACS, it's good that they receive a response to determine whether they can be fixed or not. I don't consider this harassment, but rather additional help that could help IPACS maintain the proper functioning of this simulator.

Then ("We know the answer that's repeated too; we're a small team and we can't answer every message")

As many here, including IPACS, have said, this question has already been asked or addressed several times. I'm talking, of course, about "major fixes or repairs"—improvements are secondary. But do you know why the questions keep coming up? Because in most cases, there have never been any answers.

But that doesn't mean people are denigrating IPACS with their questions.

Bug reports are perfectly fine. If I discover something I consider a bug, I report it, and I completely understand that if a bug is still unresolved after a few weeks or months, people will ask about it. One short question is fine, however, writing multiple, endless posts about the same bug or asking the same question a other user asked in the same thread is for me a nuisance.

My post was directed only against the people who denigrating Aerofly and IPACS, and against the people who insult me or threaten me with violence just because I ask them to calm down or they don't like my opinion.